How many climatologists deny climate change

Checked on December 1, 2025
Disclaimer: Factually can make mistakes. Please verify important information or breaking news. Learn more.

Executive summary

Most available sources show that outright rejection of warming’s reality among professional climatologists is vanishingly small: surveys and scientific organizations report a strong consensus (NASA cites 97% of actively publishing climate scientists agreeing humans cause warming) [1]. Reporting and fact-checking pieces show that large lists of supposed “deniers” rarely include many trained climatologists — e.g., a viral 1,107-signature declaration contained <1% climatologists or climate scientists [2].

1. What the data and major science bodies say

The mainstream measure of expert agreement is overwhelming: NASA summarizes research finding that about 97% of actively publishing climate scientists agree humans are causing global warming [1]. Major science organizations and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) back that position; reviews and summaries cited by authoritative agencies form the basis for the consensus statement reported by NASA [1]. Available sources do not mention a credible counter-estimate that places a substantial share of climatologists in outright denial of warming.

2. Claims, lists and the illusion of many “deniers”

High-profile lists and declarations claiming hundreds or thousands of experts deny a climate emergency often collapse on inspection. Euronews examined a viral list of about 1,200 signatories and found precisely 1,107 names — but less than 1% described themselves as climatologists or climate scientists [2]. That pattern — many names but few domain experts — is a recurring theme in reporting and fact‑checks [2].

3. How scholars distinguish “denial,” “skepticism” and “contrarianism”

Academic work cautions against blunt labels. PNAS and other scholars warn the debate includes nuances: contrarians, skeptics, and deniers are different groups with different motives and credibility, and lumping them together oversimplifies expert views [3]. Historical reviews show many scientist-skeptics have shifted from denying warming’s occurrence to questioning attribution, impacts, or policy prescriptions — a spectrum of positions that is not equivalent to outright denial [4] [5].

4. Why visible dissent can mislead public perception

Media coverage, political actors, and organized campaigns amplify a small minority into the appearance of parity. Investigations and reporting document long-running campaigns and industry funding that have nurtured and publicized dissenting voices to influence public debate and policy [6] [4]. The New York Times and other outlets report that disinformation and information campaigns continue to shape public impressions even as the scientific record strengthens [7].

5. Historical context: the minority that dissented

Empirical archives show pockets of scientists and commentators who have questioned mainstream climate findings for decades; publications and committees at times catalogued hundreds of “skeptics” with a range of views, from attribution doubts to full denial [5]. But authoritative observers like Stefan Rahmstorf have noted that scientist-skeptics increasingly accept that warming is happening and focus on attribution and responses rather than denying temperature rise itself [4] [5].

6. Limits, disagreements and what sources don’t say

The sources report strong consensus on human-caused warming but also document disagreements about impacts, models, and policy responses [1] [3]. Available sources do not provide a recent, head-count-style audit that enumerates precisely how many people who list their occupation as “climatologist” now describe themselves as climate-change deniers; nor do they offer a single definitive roster of professional climatologists classified by belief. Where large counts appear (e.g., 1,107 signatories), close inspection shows few true climatologists among them [2].

7. Takeaway for readers and journalists

When someone claims “many climatologists deny climate change,” demand two things: clarity about what “deny” means, and evidence that signatories are bona fide, actively publishing climatologists. The best-available authoritative summaries and surveys — and NASA’s cited 97% figure — show that among actively publishing climate scientists the consensus on human-caused warming is overwhelming [1]. Reporting and fact-checking (Euronews) show that tall lists often do not substantiate the political claim that large numbers of climatologists reject the science [2].

Limitations: this analysis relies only on the supplied sources and therefore cannot incorporate studies or polls published elsewhere after those documents.

Want to dive deeper?
How many climate scientists reject human-caused global warming as of 2025?
What fraction of peer-reviewed climate research disputes anthropogenic climate change?
Which climatologists publicly deny mainstream climate science and why?
How do scientific consensus studies measure agreement on climate change?
How has the number of climate skeptics among scientists changed over the past two decades?